As the Legislature printed it
DIVISION 4. WORKERS' COMPENSATION AND INSURANCE [3200 - 6002] · PART 4. COMPENSATION PROCEEDINGS [5300 - 6002] · CHAPTER 2. Limitations of Proceedings [5400 - 5413]
(a) Knowledge of an injury, obtained from any source, on the part of an employer, the employer’s managing agent, superintendent, foreman, or other person in authority, or knowledge of the assertion of a claim of injury sufficient to afford opportunity to the employer to make an investigation into the facts, is equivalent to service under Section 5400. (b) (1) If liability is not rejected within 90 days after the date the claim form is filed under Section 5401, the injury shall be presumed compensable under this division. The presumption of this subdivision is rebuttable only by evidence discovered subsequent to the 90-day period. (2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), for injuries or illnesses defined in Sections 3212 to 3212.85, inclusive, and Sections 3212.9 to 3213.2, inclusive, if the liability is not rejected within 75 days after the date the claim form is filed pursuant to Section 5401, the injury shall be presumed compensable under this division. The presumption of this subdivision is rebuttable only by evidence discovered subsequent to the 75-day period. (c) Within one working day after an employee files a claim form under Section 5401, the employer shall authorize the provision of all treatment, consistent with Section 5307.27, for the alleged injury and shall continue to provide the treatment until the date that liability for the claim is accepted or rejected. Until the date the claim is accepted or rejected, liability for medical treatment shall be limited to ten thousand dollars ($10,000). (d) Treatment provided under subdivision (c) does not give rise to a presumption of liability on the part of the employer. (e) Upon appropriation by the Legislature, the Division of Workers’ Compensation shall identify and amend its existing data collection processes to include collection of the date on which the claimant is notified of acceptance, denial, or conditional denial of liability for a claim, consistent with this section.
How panels applied this section
Newest released decisions whose legal-standard extraction named this section. Each quotes the passage and links to the official PDF. Unofficial guide — not legal advice.
- ADJ17880601 · 2026-02-26 · Lodi District Office§ 5402
Determinative passage · p.4Pursuant to section 5402(b)(1), "[i]f liability is not rejected within 90 days after the date the Claim Form is filed under Section 5401, the injury shall be presumed compensable under this division." As noted above, the Claim Form was filed and served on June 28, 2023. As such, defendant had 90 days from June 28, 2023, to deny applicant's claim. To date, no denial has been issued. Further, during the October 2, 2025 trial, the parties stipulated to the lack of a denial and the applicability of the 5402(b)(1) presumption. (MOH and SOE, October 2, 2025, p. 2.)
Once the Claim Form is filed and no denial is issued within 90 days, the injury is presumed compensable, shifting the burden to the defendant to rebut with evidence discovered after the 90-day period.
Official decision · page 4 → - ADJ15792171 · 2026-01-06 · San Bernardino District Office§ 5402
Determinative passage · p.41. Lien claimant is entitled to reimbursement for treatment provided during the delay period for the defendant's failure to establish medical control and provide medical care.
Lien claimant's claim for reimbursement during delay period was deferred pending injury findings.
Official decision · page 4 → - ADJ16834660 · 2025-08-21 · Anaheim District Office§ 5402
Determinative passage · p.1Lien claimant contends that it is entitled to reimbursement during the delay period pursuant to Labor Code section 5402(c) because the employer failed to provide notice of its medical provider network and failed to comply with its statutory treatment and notice obligations following receipt of notice of applicant's claimed injury. Lien claimant also contends the reporting of Omid Haghighinia, D.C., is a valid medical-legal expense because the reporting addressed the compensability of a disputed claim.
Lien claimant contended entitlement to reimbursement during the delay period pursuant to this statute.
Official decision · page 1 → - ADJ18451814 · 2025-01-03 · Lodi District Office§ 5402
Determinative passage · p.8In this matter, we agree with the WCJ that the presumption of compensability afforded under section 5402 does not apply. In order for an alleged industrial injury to be presumed compensable pursuant to section 5402(b), the applicant must show when defendant received the DWC-1 claim form. Here, there is no evidence applicant ever filed a claim form with the employer, as required by sections 5401(c) and (d). In order to trigger the section 5402(b) presumption of compensability, use of the claim form is mandatory, and the filing of an application is not sufficient to trigger the presumption. As applicant has not demonstrated when the employer received the claim form, the presumption of compensability under section 5402(b) is not applicable. We note, however, that even without the presumption of compensability, applicant is still "free to prove in the ordinary manner his injury's industrial causation." (Wagner, supra, at p. 104.)
Presumption of compensability applies if employer does not deny liability within 90 days of claim form filing; applicant did not file claim form here.
Official decision · page 8 → - ADJ8147459 · 2024-09-23 · Van Nuys District Office§ 5402
Determinative passage · p.5Ninety days from July 27, 2011, the day Dr. Moshfegh reports applicant notified his employer of his injury, is October 5, 2011. The record contains a denial letter dated November 16, 2011 for a date of injury dated May 26, 2011, which is after the expiration of the 90-day period from July 27, 2011. (Defendant Exhibit A, Denial Letter.) Given the confusion as to the dates of injury, we refrain from making any opinions as to the issue of presumed compensability and return this matter to the trial level to develop the record on this issue. (Lab. Code, § 5701, 5906; Tyler v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 389, 394 [62 Cal.Comp.Cases 924]; see McClune v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 1117 [63 Cal.Comp.Cases 261]; McDuffie v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (2001) 67 Cal.Comp.Cases 138 (Appeals Board en banc).)
The Appeals Board refrained from deciding presumed compensability due to date confusion and remanded for further record development.
Official decision · page 5 → - ADJ12542212 · 2024-09-16 · Los Angeles District Office§ 5402
Determinative passage · p.3With regard to the issue of the Labor Code section 5402(b) presumption, Labor Code section 5401 requires that a worker be provided with a DWC-1 claim form after the employer gains knowledge of the worker's injury or claim of injury. Labor Code section 5402(b) states: "If liability is not rejected within 90 days after the date the claim form is filed under Section 5401, the injury shall be presumed compensable under this division. The presumption of this subdivision is rebuttable only by evidence discovered subsequent to the 90-day period."
The presumption applies unless timely denial is proven; here, the claim form was mailed by an agent and not signed by applicant, but this was found to substantially comply with the statute.
Official decision · page 3 → - ADJ15168100 · 2024-08-01 · Van Nuys District Office§ 5402
Determinative passage · p.1Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Findings of Fact and Order (F&O) issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on May 24, 2024. The WCJ found that applicant sustained injury arising out of and in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to her abdominal wall; that the record needs development on the disputed issue of industrial injury to the psychiatric system; and that applicant's claim is presumptively compensable pursuant to Labor Code, section 5402. The WCJ ordered that the "disputed issue of industrial injury to the psychiatric system is deferred pending further development of the record."
The WCJ found the claim presumptively compensable under this section.
Official decision · page 1 → - ADJ14330494 · 2024-06-11 · Oakland District Office§ 5402
Determinative passage · p.11In Clark v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2001) 66 Cal.Comp.Cases 269, 270 [2001 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 4865] (writ denied), we concluded that "[s]ection 5402 applies to claims of injury, not to parts of the body claimed to be injured as a result of an industrial injury." We explained that "[j]ust as a claim which is amended after the passing of the statute of limitations to include injury to a new part of the body relates back to the date of the original filing, so does an amendment adding a new part of the body to the claim form relate back for purposes of Section 5402." (Id. at 270-271 (citation omitted).) Therefore, we "concluded that Applicant's amended claim form to allege new parts of the body did not trigger a new period for rejecting a claim of injury." (Id. at 270.)
The Appeals Board found the presumption of compensability did not apply to the amended claim for concussion as the original injury was accepted.
Official decision · page 11 →
All 25 decisions naming § 5402 →
The rules written under this section
A statute says what is owed; Title 8 says by when, on what form, and what happens if the deadline passes. These name § 5402as what they implement.
- 8 CCR § 9770Definitions.
- 8 CCR § 10100Definitions--Prior to January 1, 1994.
- 8 CCR § 10100.1Definitions--On or After January 1, 1994.
- 8 CCR § 10100.2Definitions
- 8 CCR § 10108Audit Violations--General Rules.
- 8 CCR § 10109Duty to Conduct Investigation; Duty of Good Faith.
- 8 CCR § 10111Schedule of Administrative Penalties for injuries on or after January 1, 1990, but before January 1, 1994.
- 8 CCR § 10111.1Schedule of Administrative Penalties for Injuries on or After January 1, 1994.
- 8 CCR § 10111.2Full Compliance Audit Penalty Schedules; Target Audit Penalty Schedule.
- 8 CCR § 10136General: Definitions.
- 8 CCR § 10138Claim Form and Notice of Potential Eligibility for Benefits.
- 8 CCR § 10139Workers' Compensation Claim Form (DWC 1) and Notice of Potential Eligibility.
- 8 CCR § 10140Employer's Responsibility to Process Claim Form, Claims Administrator's Duty to Provide Claim Form.
- 8 CCR § 10141Dismissal of Inactive Claim by Operation of Law After Notice.
- 8 CCR § 10863Verification of Compliance with Labor Code Section 4903.6 on Filing of Lien Claim or Application by Lien Claimant.
Also on this
Unofficial guide — not legal advice. The statute is the state’s text. The quotes are litigated applications, not a prediction.
About California Labor Code § 5402
What is California Labor Code § 5402?
Labor Code § 5402 sits in CHAPTER 2. Limitations of Proceedings [5400 - 5413]. The statute on this page begins: (a) Knowledge of an injury, obtained from any source, on the part of an employer, the employer’s managing agent, superintendent, foreman. The official display is on LegInfo; this is a reprint.
Did WCAB panels apply Labor Code § 5402 in this corpus?
This corpus has 25 released decisions whose extracted legal standards named § 5402. Quotes and PDFs are on this page. That is not every case in California that ever cited the section.